Why Normative Interpretation? Because it is Consistent

Hermeneutics is the study of methods of interpretation, especially of Biblical texts. Exegesis is the process of explaining these interpretations.

There is, of course, more than one method of interpreting Biblical texts. The hermeneutic of choice for this blog is called Normative, Natural, and sometimes the historical-grammatical interpretive principle. Some refer to it as literal.

The term "literal" implies, incorrectly, that figures of speech and symbols are not considered relevant to scriptural interpretation. Therefore the term is avoided because of the baggage that accompanies it. As will be seen in the "Golden Rule of Interpretation" there are indeed symbols used in the Bible, these however are usually explained in the context of the text they appear in.

One other hermeneutic which will be mentioned here is the allegorical hermeneutic. This interpretive approach expounds the belief that the use of symbols and allegory (fables) is used extensively throughout the Old and New Testaments. There are many reasons this is believed to be so by its adherents, far too many to be addressed here. The problem with this approach is that those who make use of it cannot agree amongst themselves what is allegorical and what should be read literally. Furthermore where there is agreement concerning what is allegory and what is not, the interpretation of those allegorical passages cannot be agreed upon.

The allegorical approach is rejected here, and the normative, or natural interpretation of Scripture is affirmed. Scripture must stand upon its own merits. ( 2Ti 3:16 ) If it does not then man becomes the final arbiter of truth, and each may do what is right in his own eyes.

This declaration is made now so no one is deceived into thinking there is another approach being taken. The reader will find affirmations of:

• The Jewish roots of the Christian faith
• Israel's, that is the Jewish peoples, rightful place as the chosen people of God
• Orthodoxy (right teaching/opinion)
• The Ministry of the Holy Spirit
• The basics of the Christian faith

The reader will also find specific explanations and rejection of:

• Anti-Semitism, in all its guises
• Replacement Theology - The Church is not Israel
• Heresies
• Apostasy - departures from the faith professed
• Various hermenuetical approaches

The goal is to provide historical background and reasoned arguments for those who seek to understand the foundational teachings of their faith in more detail. May the Traditional, Evangelical, Charismatic, and Pentecostal all find something here.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." - Herbert Spencer

Pharasies and Legalistic Christianity

---

These are notes from Arnold Fruchtenbaum's Life of Messiah tape series. This is to be seriously recommended if you are serious about learning more about the Historical and Jewish context of the Life and Times of Yeshua.

Pharisaism and Legalistic Christianity

Legalism was the Pharisaical error that Yeshua corrected. He railed against the additions to the Mosaic Law, and defended and defined the Mosaic Law as sufficient. The Mishnah was the oral law of the Jews, and it was not written at the time of Christ. When He said "You have heard it said love your neighbour and hate your enemies" he was quoting the mishnah. His response was Mosaic Law, "I say to you love your enemies..."

Legalism had become extreem. The disciples were charged with working on the Sabbath when they ate corn they had just picked. They were accused of harvesting, threshing, winnowing, and storing (eating), all forms of work, on the Sabbath. It got so bad it was considered risky to walk on grass on the Sabbath in case you might accidentally "harvest" a wind-sown corn.

Acts of Mercy and Necessity were never against the Mosaic Law. The temple priests worked every day of the week, and twice as hard on the Sabbath. The Pharisees had no difficulties with this inconsistency. In their attempt to "close the wholes in the fence" left by the Mosaic Law burden upon burden had been heaped upon the people. Jesus corrected this, explained how he Law should be interpreted (Sermon on the Mount), and in doing so proclaimed the Mosaic Law AS WRITTEN to be sufficient. Scripture is sufficient with out human additions or interpretation.

Christianity has also its own form of extreem legalism. Don't dance, don't listen to rock music, don't use dice. What is wrong with using dice? Gamblers use dice and we should not give the appearance of doing evil. On his basis we should not drive cars because bank robbers drive cars, we should give the appearance of doing evil.

Yeshua came to free us from bondage, not add burdens to our lives.

The "Golden Rule" of Interpretation (Rule 1 of 4)

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.

"The key point is that the Bible should not be approached on the assumption that it is loaded with symbols and hence hard to understand. It is not. The Bible should be approached with the assumption that this is a book that can be understood just like any other book that is taken literally. Besides figures of speech, the Bible does use symbols, but the symbols are usually explained, they are explained by the usage of literal words. Unless the text indicates clearly that it should be taken symbolically, the passage should be understood literally."

- The Footsteps of the Messiah pp 4 (Dr A.G.Fruchtenbaum)
Used with permission of Ariel Ministries

The Law of Double Reference (Rule 2 of 4)

"This law observes the fact that often a passage or a block of Scripture is speaking of two different persons or two different events that are separated by a long period of time."

According to Dr. Fruchtenbaum, the two are blended into one passage. It can be determined that there are two events, or two persons being referred to, because of what other portions of scripture say.

An example of this law is the first and second coming of Christ. No hint is given that there is a period of time between the two events. See Zechariah 9:9-10, 9:9 is speaking of the first coming, 9:10 the second.

Dr. Fruchtenbaum is at pains to point out that this is NOT the "Law of Double Fulfilment" which he rejects. This law suggests that a prophecy may be fulfilled twice.

Excerpts from: - The Footsteps of the Messiah pp 4-5 (Dr A.G.Fruchtenbaum)
Used with permission of Ariel Ministries

The Law of Recurrence (Rule 3 of 4)

"This law describes the fact that in some passages of Scripture there exists the recording of an event followed by a second recording of the same event giving more details to the first."

See Genesis 1:1-2:25. Genesis 1:1-2:3 - 7 days in chronological order. Genesis 2:4-2:25 goes back to the sixth day to provide added details.

- The Footsteps of the Messiah pp 4 (Dr A.G.Fruchtenbaum)
Used with permission of Ariel Ministries

The Law of Context (Rule 4 of 4)

"A text apart from its context is a pretext.A verse can only mean what it means in its context and must not be taken out of its context. "

- The Footsteps of the Messiah pp 6 (Dr A.G.Fruchtenbaum)
Used with permission of Ariel Ministries


A pretext is an excuse to do something or say something. Pretexts may be based on a half-truth or developed in the context of a misleading fabrication. Pretexts have been used to conceal the true purpose or rationale behind actions and words.

Without this law, the statement "you can make the Bible say anything", would be true.